1. Field of Invention
The present invention relates to the field of devices which incorporates added space into a living area such as a house, so as to act as a generally contained area for use by a pet. More particularly, this invention relates to a pet enclosure attached to a living area which provides serviceable access and protective measures, including those of health, safety and security, to those affected areas of enclosure usage and of living area incorporation. Most particularly, this invention relates to a pet enclosure mounted within a service opening in a dwelling wall, window, or door which provides a designated, outdoor usage area for an indoor pet, including the placement and servicing of stored contents such as a litter tray.
2. Description of Prior Art
Owners of small animals, and especially cat owners, have in the past been supportive of various devices that attempt to mitigate the apparent inconveniences and disadvantages of owning indoor pets with the advantages of such relationship. Likewise, conscientious pet owners have attempted to adapt their own dwelling environments to make this shared living space as comfortable as is reasonably possible for both themselves and their pets. Pet owners are additionally confronted with the dilemma, on the one hand, to provide for the basic needs and instincts of their animals; and concurrently, to be mindful of an owner's responsibility to provide a safe and healthy environment in which both can congenially co-exist.
Heretofore, prior art devices directed at accomplishing these goals have been assorted and numerous. Various litter boxes and litter materials have been employed to dispose of indoor pet excrement. For example, a disposable cat litter system in U.S. Pat. No. 4,872,420, a drying litter box in U.S. Pat. No. 4,696,257, a disposable litter box in U.S. Pat. No. 4,627,382, a pet litter box with inner tray in U.S. Pat. No. 4,616,598, and a stacked arrangement of litter boxes in U.S. Pat. No. 4,271,787. All of these devices have the disadvantage of being located within the confines of the dwelling space whereby, the animal urine and feces odor is partially absorbed and dispersed into the dwelling space but still lingers therein.
Other pet owners prefer to install a pet door or hatch in a dwelling wall to allow free passage of the animal to excrete outdoors. Numerous configurations and examples of such devices have been patented. While satisfying one object, the disadvantages of these devices remains wherein, the animal can contract disease, unwanted mating, and injury in an uncontained outdoors. And further, due to current building development trends of high density and multiple story dwelling configurations, the practice of the pet excreting outdoors is progressively more likely to create offense by intruding on a neighbor's property and accordingly, less likely to be possible without ground floor access.
Many pet owners, although cognizant of the aforementioned problems which confront outdoor, free-roaming pets, and yet still feeling compelled to provide their animal with the outdoor experience, have employed various devices for intermittent outdoor containment. A plethora of detached pens and portable enclosures have been patented; and many, such as the family dog house and the cardboard box cat house, have simply prevailed in general use for an extended time. Although allowing the pet confined access to outside exposure, the problem with all previous outdoor enclosures is that they greatly limit the movement and accessibility of the pet and are generally supported by the ground; and thereby, their placement is limited and the protection they provide from other disruptive animals is diminished.
Thereafter, several enclosures were invented of the type which, in combination, incorporate a general enclosure provided with a pet door access. Animal shelters in U.S. Pat. No. 2,932,279 of giles and U.S. Pat. No. 3,738,322 of Smith both suggest enclosures comprised of substantially closed walls, mounted in an unsecured fashion in a wall opening, projecting interiorly of the dwelling, and provided with an access for an animal that is outside of the dwelling to obtain shelter within the confines therein. Summarily, these inventions have the limited capability to provide interior shelter for an outside animal while segregating the pet from the general dwelling area. More significantly, these devices do not integrate the general use areas of the animal with those of the owner.
Most recently, in the combination animal carrier and indoor-outdoor toilet in U.S. Pat. No. 4,029,048 of Gershbein, a device was invented that made an attempt to address one of the most undesirable aspects of indoor pet and owner cohabitation. More specifically, this device is a portable, box-like, generally enclosed litter tray holder. A typical installation of the proposed embodiment is that of placing the device in the considerably large opening of a vertically operated window with the box cantilevered exteriorly of the dwelling. This provides a space wherein a litter box is placed which attempts to contain the odors generated therein to an area that is generally disposed away from the dwelling living area.
With the Gershbein device, a number of critically essential ramifications necessary for functional success, and thereby widespread domestic application, are not contemplated. All of the prior art devices heretofore known, most specifically the Gershbein toilet, attempt to satisfy only myopic and partial solutions to this indoor-outdoor pet cohabitation arrangement; Therein, they suffer from a number of inherent shortcomings and disadvantages:
(a) The enclosure is constructed in an integral form of a generally consistent material and is installed in a cantilevered fashion; thus, the requisite strength, type, and thickness of the material of the entire structure is dictated by the critical load stresses placed on a few limited axes relative to the mounting means. Whereby, an over-encumbering type and excessive amount of material, which translates to increased product weight and cost, must be employed in its fabrication in order to structurally satisfy the installation and subsequent use of such a device. In addition, the term of the general use-life of an integrally constructed device is limited directly to the functional obsolescence or damage of any single part or area thereof.
(b) The inherent form and portable nature, respectively dictate that the device: (1) requires installation in an excessively large wall opening approximately equivalent to the longitudinal cross sectional area of the interior use area; and further, (2) requires a mounting means with an ease and quickness of installation and removal. Given the present and futurely projected incidence of societal crime rates, a device that encourages and enhances the opportunity for dwelling intruder access, has limited chance of commercial acceptance or general usage. In addition, the substantial width and height of the requisite hole for device installation discourages the dwelling owner: (1) from structurally altering wall framing members; and further, (2) from defacing the dwelling wall surfaces in such a grand manner, whereby to necessitate expansive and disfiguring wall patch repair work in the event of device removal.
(c) The generally configured shape and suggested installation make no consideration and provide no accommodation for sealing and waterproofing the dwelling wall opening. Wherein, prior art enclosures contemplate the integral use of a dwelling wall as part of its operation, it is not generally functional without providing a protective means from inviting damage to its respective wall openings and, subsequently, to the adjacent dwelling space. Logic precludes the use of an invention that attempts to relieve one condition, litter box odor, only to exacerbate a more serious one, dwelling water damage.
(d) Although the Gershbein toilet enclosure provides for side wall vents and a circulating fan to diminish the odors generated therein, a problem exists wherein the critical importance of the general proportionate relation of combined wall, roof, and floor surface area to total ventilation surface area is specifically rejected; and, further rejected is the critical placements of the ventilation system. An additional critical condition is not contemplated wherein, means have not been included for the dispersement of undesirable heated air and increased air pressure inside of the enclosure. Specifically, floor ventilation is not contemplated. An enclosure of this type, with only side wall vents, provides a general cross air movement that has a limited capacity to disperse odor, accumulated heat, and increased air pressure. Furthermore, and equally as significant, this cross-ventilation has limited means of preventing a backdraft of offensive, odorous, hot or cold air from infiltrating back into the adjacent dwelling space. This backdrafting is a direct consequence of both heated air and increased air pressure; The latter being a consequence of ambient wind conditions entering and leaving the enclosures at an unequal rate; therein, creating a higher air pressure zone in the enclosure relative to the lesser air pressure zone of the adjacent dwelling space. Without a substantially open enclosure, unlike the aforementioned one that is substantially closed, these undesirable conditions can preclude the device's effective operation and use thereof. Notwithstanding, as substantiated by numerous cat behavior authorities, a cat will often refuse to approach a litter box area that is abundantly odorous, urine soaked, or unserviced.
(e) Means are not provided for preventing insects from invading the enclosure space through the ventilating means; thereby, causing possible health problems for the pet and subsequent infestation of the adjacent dwelling space. The contents of the litter tray will be a prime attraction to these insects and this device does not contemplate this health risk.
(f) The smallness of its portable size and the explicit function of toilet prohibits the use of the enclosure for general pet lounging and fails to provide the health enhancement advantages as a result thereof, both physical and psychological; whereby, the exposure to fresh air contributes to an animal's healthful coat and general well being.
Summarily, all prior art in this field have the common disadvantage of narrowly focusing on one device or another that provides an enclosed space for the pet, which also happens to be added to a living area. The present device has a more broadly focused context that provides for a protective added space, which is made a part of a living area. The disadvantageous general difference in the prior art is one of the apparent implication of an afterthought in consideration of the devices' integration within the general living areas. By comparison, the present invention provides equal forethought of consideration for the device being integration-sensitive within the affected living areas, as well as being operably-effective in the device's designated usage.